Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Dear Benedikt,

The field of view is actually set by the field number of the eyepiece
divided by the mag of the objective and any intervening optics (FOV=E/(Obj
x Tubelens, etc).

A lot depends on the amount of fluorescence available from your cell.  If
weak, use the 63x.

Also, consider the working distance.  The 100x has much less working distance.

Hope this is helpful,
Barbara Foster
Microscopy/Microscopy Education
125 Paridon Street, Suite 102
Springfield, MA 01118
PH: 413-746-6931  FX: 413-746-9311  Web: www.MicroscopyEducation.com

~@~@~~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@
Optimizing Light Microscopy for Biological and Clinical Labs is still
available
in individual copies or classroom size orders.  Visit
www.MicroscopyEducation.com
for details.
~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@



At 06:52 PM 11/27/02 +0100, Benedikt Kost wrote:
>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>am I better off with a  63x /na 1,4 (oil immersion) or with a 100x/na 1,4
>(oil immersion) lens for the confocal imaging of small cells with a
>diameter of around 10 micrometer, given that through the 63x lens I can
>scan a ca 7.5x7.5 micrometer square at maximal zoom?
>
>thanks a lot for your comments!
>
>benedikt kost
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Benedikt Kost, PhD
>Heidelberg Institute for Plant Sciences (HIP)
>Im Neuenheimer Feld 360
>69120 Heidelberg
>Germany
>
>+49 (0) 6221 54 5788 (tel)
>+49 (0) 6221 54 5859 (fax)
>
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>
>http://www.bot.uni-heidelberg.de/hip/kost/index.htm
>
>
>
>